Of the four State Senators who refused to put a price on NYC’s free bridges in March, 2009 — a decision that’s hurting transit riders to this day — three are now facing federal fraud, embezzlement, and/or corruption charges. This got me wondering: Is there something intrinsic to fervent defenders of free rides that makes them more likely to go crooked? Or is just about everyone in Albany corrupt, and the feds are sending shots across the bow to the ones who might mess with our transit system in the future.

Think about it.

Monserrate, of course, was expelled from the State Senate and then defeated in a special election for his old seat by Assembly Member José Peralta. Peralta was one of the leading opponents of bridge tolls in the Assembly and put his opposition to congestion pricing front and center on his campaign website. In Peralta's Senate district, 53.3 percent of households do not own a car [PDF].

Carlos Ramos, Jr. and Desiree Pilgrim-Hunter.

In a press release tied to the Staten Island Ferry crash, Ramos announced his general support for sustainable transportation. "Innovative ways to relieve vehicular congestion in the city, such as the 'Yankee Ferry' here in the Bronx, should be explored in an effort to reduce our carbon footprint and thwart potential environmental hazards," the statement read.

In the district where Ramos is running, 67.0 percent of households do not own a car [PDF].

Desiree Pilgrim-Hunter, a leader in the fight for higher wages at the Kingsbridge Armory, has taken on scandal-battered Pedro Espada. Before she takes any position on MTA financing, Pilgrim-Hunter told us, she wants to "look at the books -- the real books -- to look at what's going on and how this money is being managed." 

She stressed that she supported the MTA ("We have the best transportation system in the world, just about"), but declined to give a specific answer about how she'd help provide the transit system with financial stability. "We've seen service cuts, we've seen fare hikes, we've seen new taxes," she said. "Somehow it doesn't seem to work, or it's just a temporary fix. I think we need to look at the entire structure of the MTA and whether it needs an overhaul."

Pilgrim-Hunter also spoke about her last big tangle with the MTA, over the location of a Select Bus Service stop in her neighborhood. She thought that the stop, located at the bottom of a steep hill, wasn't accessible to senior citizens or the disabled. Though Pilgrim-Hunter was successful in getting the stop moved, she still has doubts about the Fordham Road bus improvements overall. "It has caused us to lose businesses," she said, "because the stops have taken away the parking for the businesses to get their deliveries and for their customers to come."

In the district where Pilgrim-Hunter is running, 71.5 percent of households do not own a car [PDF].

The primaries are only four months away, and election season is starting to heat up in New York. All signs point to strong anti-incumbent sentiment among voters, with several entrenched legislators facing primary challenges. In Brooklyn's 27th State Senate district, long-time incumbent Carl Kruger is facing a primary challenge for the seat he's held since 1994.

Kruger is best known to Streetsblog readers for his role last year in gutting the Ravitch Plan and killing bridge tolls, which would have put the transit system on steadier financial footing. His opponent, Igor Oberman, has made support for public transit a centerpiece of his campaign.

Oberman, an administrative judge for the Taxi and Limousine Commission and Environmental Control Board, launched his campaign a few weeks ago after deciding that the powerful finance committee chair needed a serious opponent. "I don't think he represents the people inside the district or the Democratic Party," said Oberman. 

For the last few weeks, Oberman has been handing out literature [PDF] at busy subway stations across southern Brooklyn, criticizing Kruger and fellow Fare Hike Four members Ruben Diaz, Sr. and Pedro Espada for scuttling the plan to toll bridges over the Harlem and East Rivers, an act of obstructionism that set the stage for major service cuts and layoffs. Transit riders will feel more effects soon: The MTA's budget gap still exceeds $450 million.

At the Kings Highway station this morning, Oberman questioned whether his opponent can relate to constituents who depend on transit. "When's the last time he ever took the subway?" he asked, before flashing his very well-worn MetroCard. Oberman believes that "this is a commuter district" and that transit is "as important to them as police service or ambulances." 

Oberman supports bridge tolls, if the revenue is used to keep transit fares low and service strong. "We deserve a better transit system," he said. "We're trying to go green and compete as a major metro area."

Oberman also thinks that fighting for transit is a political winner, even if it means supporting bridge tolls. "Are bridge tolls popular in this district? No," he said. "But more popular than cutting student MetroCards." 

To get a sense for how Oberman's message is playing, I spoke to two commuters who took his literature. Andrew Delre, who was waiting for the Q train, said he believes that it's "definitely" important to be represented in the State Senate by another subway rider. What about bridge tolls? "Definitely not," he said. "It's just another tax for the people of New York City."

Another rider, who gave her name as Rachel, said she agreed in full with Oberman's platform. "I don't think they should raise the fares again," she said. "But people with cars should have to pay tolls too. I mean, it's only fair." 

Streetsblog has a message in with Senator Kruger's office to see how his transit platform stacks up against his challenger's.

Sens. Kruger, Diaz Sr. and Espada, three of the Fare Hike Four, giving transit riders the business. Photo: AP/Voice

"Our ability to budget is only as good as our ability to forecast. We were dependent upon data supplied by the Office of Management and Budget with the understanding that it was verified by the MTA's own fiscal staff. Furthermore, our projections were based on the fiscal year rather than the calendar year. This critical point should have been taken into account when the MTA fiscal staff developed its parameters."

Insisting that the new payroll tax will someday do the job, Senate spokesman Austin Shafran accused the MTA of employing scare tactics, while transportation committee chair Martin Malave Dilan lashed out at the new transit chief, then in his ninth week on the job. Again, from the Observer:

[Dilan] is angry that the M.T.A. didn't say anything about its sudden $343 million deficit sooner.

"It is an affront to our burgeoning partnership, often discussed in previous months, to exclude us from this critical information," Dilan wrote in a letter to M.T.A. CEO Jay Walder. "It appears, even under new leadership, that business will continue as usual with Gary Dellaverson assuming the addition[al] role of press secretary for the MTA. Instead of a cooperative exchange of thoughts and information, we may be left with an adversarial relationship played out in the press."

So, who's going to hold these pols to account? Probably not the Working Families Party, whose latest online petition amplifies the MTA-bashing of Kruger and company. The governor, meanwhile, looks to be sitting it out altogether as the engine of the region's economy is threatened with a massive breakdown.

Will any state legislator step up and show some leadership at this critical moment? Eric Schneiderman? Dan Squadron? Liz Krueger? John Sampson? Anyone?

"We'll look at it over the course of the next couple of months," said Kruger. ... "After that, we'll finish our vetting process, which hasn't even begun yet, and we'll have a better idea about the timetable (for a confirmation vote)."

When Liz Benjamin informed Kruger that Walder has already spoken of restoring public trust in the agency -- a task that will be much more difficult thanks to shameless hucksters like Kruger himself, the senator replied:

"I come from Missouri; don't show me, tell me. I mean, everybody says they're for oversight and accountability. What does that mean? What does it mean?"

I swear, this blog just writes itself sometimes.

Well, here we are again.

One year after State Assembly Democrats killed New York City’s attempt to fund mass transit and reduce traffic gridlock, sustainable transport advocates find themselves suffering yet another huge defeat in Albany.

Fixing Albany requires volunteers dragging themselves out to the Kings Highway Q train platform in the middle of Carl Kruger’s district and handing palm cards to commuters explaining that the impending fare hike is the direct result of their state senator’s fine work.

On Wednesday the MTA Board approved the “doomsday” scenario – massive fare hikes and sweeping service cuts for New York City’s eight million transit riders. The State Legislature easily could have avoided doomsday by approving Richard Ravitch’s financing plan or coming up with a viable alternative of its own. But a handful of New York City State Senators, Carl Kruger, Ruben Diaz Sr., Pedro Espada and Hiram Monserrate – call them the Fare Hike Four – couldn’t bear the thought of imposing new fees on New York City’s motorists. In working to protect the free driving privilege of New York City’s armada of horn-honking, exhaust-spewing, road-clogging single-passenger car commuters, the State Senate has brought the city’s transit system to the brink of financial ruin. If you ride a train or bus in New York City you're going to pay the price.

The irresponsibility, the destructiveness and sheer lack of seriousness displayed by the Fare Hike Four is without question and we could spend all day heaping scorn on them. But the Senate Democrats are hardly any worse than the minority Republicans who were perfectly happy to sit by and watch the train wreck. And we could just as well place the blame for our current mess on the State Assembly members who killed congestion pricing last year.

Rather than pointing fingers at our feckless state government, advocates for livable streets and mass transit need to take a good long look in the mirror. Despite assembling a broad and seemingly powerful coalition in support of our issues, our advocacy consistently goes nowhere in Albany. That needs to change. So, how?

First off, it’s obvious that we need a better policy-making process. Granted, New York’s state legislators tend to show a profound lack of seriousness when it comes to policy (see their performance on last year’s congestion mitigation commission) and they are renowned for their deeply ingrained windshield perspective. But they still need to be engaged in the process from the beginning. It didn't help that the Ravitch Plan was, in many ways, too small, too lacking in creativity and too flawed for anyone to get too excited about it. The fact that the Ravitch Plan originated outside the state legislature made it all the more easy for them to reject it.

But let’s also be clear that our losses in Albany have a lot more to do with politics than policy. Sustainable transport advocates need to build political clout. Period. At this point, almost nothing else matters. We need to join forces with mainstream environmentalists, labor groups and issue advocates working on education, housing and economic development, who are equally disgusted with the performance of New York’s state legislature. The Fare Hike Four and the Assembly Democrats who killed congestion pricing come up for reelection every two years. For the most part, they run unopposed. Until we can get some of these people unelected – or, at the very least, challenged – we are pretty much irrelevant.

Here at Streetsblog we are mostly issue advocates and wonks. We enjoy debating policy minutia in the comments section, geeking out at Rudin Center breakfasts and fleshing out the most rational possible pricing schemes for New York City’s transportation system. But fixing Albany demands less policy intellect and more political muscle. It requires volunteers dragging themselves out to the Kings Highway Q train platform in the middle of Carl Kruger’s district and handing out palm cards to morning rush hour commuters explaining that the impending fare hike is the direct result of their state senator’s fine work -- or total lack thereof. It’s about knocking on doors, spending evenings at community meetings and drumming up votes. Defeating Albany incumbents isn’t easy. Most of these guys leave office in handcuffs or a coffin. But state legislators aren’t invincible either. A lot of them have had their jobs for more than 20 years. Many of them are stale and feeble and don’t work particularly hard anymore. Daniel Squadron knocked off Sen. Martin Connor in last September’s Democratic primary by a margin of 8,034 to 6,179. It doesn’t take a lot of votes.

Still, it’s a daunting task for any individual community activist to run a campaign against a sitting state legislator. So, here’s my humble proposal: What New York needs right now is a well-organized, heavily-funded, Newt-Gingrich-Contract-With-America-style campaign to take back Albany. We need to create a broad-based reform platform and recruit a slate of viable candidates to run challenges against vulnerable Senators and Assembly members all across the city. We need to focus citywide attention on state legislature campaigns and stop letting these guys slip quietly back into office unchallenged year after year in neighborhood-level campaigns that no one even pays attention to. We’ve got to take Albany back from these people who are ruining our city.

Photo by Buck Ennis

Without new financial help from Albany soon, the MTA says its current bad finances may mean another fare hike in 2010.

That would make it three years in a row for fare increases -- March 2008, June 2009 and early 2010 -- the worst record in the MTA's 40-plus year history.

It demonstrates a trend of shifting the costs of operating transit from some beneficiaries of the subways and buses -- such as motorists and businesses -- onto riders.  For example, the riders' share of operating costs for the subways will go from 69% to an astonishing 84%, according to the MTA, if the just-approved fare increases are implemented.

Under the plan proposed by former MTA chairman Richard Ravitch, no new fare hike would occur before 2011.

Meanwhile, the excuses for inaction are pouring in. GOP State Senator Marty Golden, a Brooklyn rep who never broke ranks to support the Ravitch plan, sent around a press release blaming the state's top Democrats for "closing the doors completely to Republicans." Senate Minority Leader Dean Skelos excused his party's monolithic opposition to the transit rescue effort in much the same way, and added that the MTA was asking for a "blank check" by seeking to fund its five-year capital program. As Liz Benjamin notes, that's exactly what the Fare Hike Four and Senate Dems have been saying.

It's a patently false claim. Any plan is subject to oversight and approval by the Capital Program Review Board. The leaders of the State Senate and the Assembly each appoint one voting member to the CPRB, as do the mayor and the governor. Any of the four voting members can veto the whole thing. Said Russianoff: "If they appropriated the money, they would still have power over how it's spent."

Because a handful of state senators representing New York City refused to back a credible plan to fund our transit system, the MTA's March 25th deadline has come and gone without any reprieve for everyone who relies on subways and buses. Head over to City Room for scenes from the final act.

Pedro Espada photo: John DeSio

For an extra jolt, read this statehouse dispatch from Politicker's Jimmy Vielkind, which includes the following exchange with Fare Hike Four member Carl Kruger about the MTA rescue:

"Did you read the New York Times today?" He said. "There's going to be a fare increase regardless of whose plan we take."

"What are their numbers? What's their plan?" Kruger continued. Glenn Blain from the Daily News said their plan was Ravitch.

"They said they needed $5 tolls to finance their plan, now they said they can do it with $2. Maybe they can do it with a dollar. Maybe they can do it with none. They have zero credibility. Zero."

This from a Finance Committee chair whose alternative "plan" was branded "silly and probably illegal."

Barring a viable MTA rescue plan, the 140,000 transit riders in Ruben Diaz. Sr.'s district will lose the Bx4 and the Bx14

Not that the Fare Hike Four concern themselves with facts and data, but in Ruben Diaz, Sr.'s Bronx district, maps show the planned elimination of bus lines Bx4 and Bx14, as well as altered or reduced service on seven additional routes. Not to mention increased wait times on the 4, 5, and 6 subway lines. Constituents of Hiram Monserrate, Pedro Espada, Jr., and Carl Kruger all face cutbacks and service eliminations as well.

With GOP senators indicating a willingness to negotiate, there may yet be an outside chance to salvage a workable, long-term MTA rescue plan. There's still time to remind your legislators what you, and the city, stand to lose without it.

OK, we have a winner of yesterday's photo caption contest. Democratic State Senators Hiram Monserrate, Carl Kruger, Pedro Espada, Jr. and Ruben Diaz, Sr. will henceforth be known as "The Fare Hike Four."

While we're at it, we figure if the State Senate is going to treat New York City's transit riders like clowns and turn the MTA funding process into a year-long circus, we're going to need a good graphic to go with the story. So, here's what Livable Streets Initiative graphic design genius Carly Clark came up with. From left-to-right that's Monserrate playing the role of the abusive Moe, Kruger as the developmentally-impaired Curly, Espada as Shemp, and Diaz as the bumbling but lovable Larry. 

We'll have travel mugs and t-shirts printed up soon so you can ride with the Fare Hike Four on your morning commute.

Pedro Espada photo: John DeSio

The State Senators (for convenience sake, let just refer to them "The Fare Hike Four" from now on) say they can satisfy the MTA’s short-term financing needs with a four percent fare and toll hike and a small payroll tax increase. The MTA says that math doesn’t work, according to Reuters:

The MTA’s chairman, H. Dale Hemmerdinger, estimated the
Senate plan would force the agency to raise fares and tolls by
17 percent — about four times more than the Senate calculated
– as it would only raise about $1 billion more.

I suppose it comes down to a question of who do you trust more with the numbers, Richard Ravitch or four venal, old pols in the nation’s most dysfunctional state legislature? If that’s a tough call for you, then it’s probably worth noting that Ravitch spent considerably more time working out his financing plan than did The Fare Hike Four. As Kathy Wylde at the Parternship for New York City says:

The State Senate has had almost a year to join the public discussion of funding for the transportation system. They waited until the very end of the process to come forward with a proposal that provides not a nickel for system maintenance and badly needed expansion of bus service, let alone a full capital program. It is time for both sides of the Senate — Democrat and Republican — to join the Governor and the Assembly in support of some version of the Ravitch Commission Plan.

Hat tip to Liz Benjamin at the Daily Politics for this snapshot of four state senators who've helped concoct a stopgap, toll-less MTA funding plan that does nothing to address the imminent decline of New York's transit system. Lest they be accused of completely shortchanging the future, they say maintenance and expansion can be taken care of next year, by raising personal income taxes throughout the 12-county MTA region. Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith is calling it all "sound practice." Politicker's Jimmy Vielkind has more from Smith.

The grinners, from left to right, are Carl Kruger, Ruben Diaz, Sr., Pedro Espada, Jr., and Hiram Monserrate (yes, that Hiram Monserrate). When these men held the Democratic takeover of the Senate hostage, they styled themselves the "four amigos." Now that they've done their level best to hamper investment in subways and buses, all to preserve a free ride to Manhattan for the car-driving minority, I think it's time for a new nickname. Something to do with horsemen, perhaps?

When asked about the MTA situation today, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Carl Kruger told Liz that his opposition to tolls on the East and Harlem River bridges has not softened but a new plan is coming together that will be, "comprehensive and so outside the box that everybody should want to partner with it." 

OK, so, I've got a free, signed copy of Jeff Mapes' "Pedaling Revolution" for the Streetsblog commenter who correctly guesses Kruger and friends' plan for staving off MTA fare hikes.

Smith's latest gambit -- calling the MTA's March 25 deadline into question -- carries a lot of risk. "The deadline seems real to us," said Russianoff, noting that there may be some wiggle room, but not much. "The concern would be if the legislators say, 'We can wait a while.' That's a recipe for inaction."

There's been some speculation that the Ravitch proposals might get folded into the state budget, but that would face similar political hurdles to a stand-alone rescue package. All 30 Republican state senators are expected to vote against the budget, said Russianoff, meaning Democrats will have to vote as a single, 32-member bloc to gain passage.

If the Gang of Three and other Democratic obstructionists fail to realize that their constituents need a well-funded transit system much more than free bridges, there is a potential solution that might garner support from elements of both parties. "One thing with promise is to do the highway and bridge program at the same time as MTA financing," said Russianoff. "That gives Republican senators a reason to vote positively on the bill." The state's highway and bridge program faces its own funding shortfall, and like the MTA, it needs new revenue streams. Some of the bridge toll alternatives that pols are floating -- such as higher gas taxes and vehicle registration fees -- make more political sense as revenue for a road program, because, Russianoff says, "the highway people think it's theirs."

I am very concerned to hear that Senators Carl Kruger; Pedro Espada, Jr.; and Ruben Diaz, Sr. will refuse to pass a transit rider rescue plan like those proposed by Governor Paterson and Speaker Silver, if that plan includes any new tolls.

These senators have made it clear what they oppose, so I'm writing to make sure you know what I, as your constituent, oppose.

* I oppose increasing fares by 23%;
* I oppose shutting down entire subway lines;
* I oppose discontinuing dozens of bus routes in every borough;
* And I oppose longer waits and overcrowding.

The Campaign is urging transit-supporting New Yorkers to send their messages today.

The Three Amigos -- Sens. Carl Kruger, Pedro Espada Jr. and Ruben Diaz Sr. -- who recently reaffirmed their relationship and started strategizing again as a team, today issued a joint statement demanding that the MTA go "back to the drawing board" and do everything possible to avoid tolling the East and Harlem river bridges.

The three senators are "demanding" that the MTA agree to a forensic audit conducted by an outside entity and a complete accounting of all its assets - including real estate holdings, which is an issue other lawmakers have been hammering on for a while now.

The trio is open to the idea of a payroll tax, which is the other revenue-generating proposal made by the Ravitch Commission, but called the tolls a "non-starter."

With the Democratic majority hanging by a minuscule 32-30 thread and Republicans showing no signs of breaking ranks to support the Ravitch proposals, it would take a unified front in the Senate to pass the rescue plan. The brazen disregard for transit riders displayed by these three lawmakers could very well torpedo any chance to stave off drastic fare hikes and service cuts, shore up the MTA's finances, and keep the subways from slipping into a state of decline.

To better appreciate the fundamental absurdity of their arguments, follow the jump or, better yet, read Liz's full post.

What the amigos might want in exchange (albeit not formally, because that's illegal) for their support of the MTA bailout is unclear.

During an interview yesterday, I asked Diaz Sr. whether he could ever see his way clear to supporting tolls, and he seemed to be open to it - but only if someone would "explain to me, please" how camera technology is going to make sure drivers from out of state pay their fair share.

"Why should I be punishing my state and the people from my district?" Diaz Sr. said. "As soon as the people from my district and the people of New York are protected, I will support anything that doesn't punish the need ones."

Diaz Sr. then insisted to me that there are "other ways" to generate and/or save the revenue necessary to stave off massive fare and toll hikes. He mentioned two of his own bills - one that would require the state to buy prescription drugs from Canada and another that would force ConEd to pay taxes - for starters.

Take it to the bank: 67 percent of households in Ruben Diaz, Sr.'s Bronx district are car-free.

"If that is in there, there's no way I'm going to vote for it and you can take that to the bank," Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. (D-Bronx) said after the afternoon meeting.

Streetsbloggers may remember Diaz as one of the legislators who opposed congestion pricing on the grounds that it may adversely affect the environment. His district faces a slew of subway and bus service reductions [PDF] without transit funding equal to that proposed under the Ravitch plan, but Diaz is as yet unwilling to stand up for the whopping 67 percent of households that don't even own a car.

Ditto Brooklyn's Carl Kruger, another congestion pricing opponent, who has called tolling "a non-starter" and "an insult to every outer-borough resident in New York City." Kruger should check his census data. Almost half of the households in his district alone are car-free, and those who own cars have an annual income that more than doubles those who don't. Yet it seems Kruger is willing to let the non-driving half of his constituency bear the brunt [PDF]. But what should we expect from the legislator who wanted to fine pedestrians for listening to iPods and talking on cell phones.

It's still unclear where Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith stands on bridge tolls. Smith's own Queens district, where some 34 percent of households don't own cars, also stands to lose bus and train service in lieu of increased MTA funding [PDF]. Like his counterpart Shelly Silver, Smith owes it to his constituents and all New Yorkers to come out strongly in favor of bridge tolls and gain majority support.